Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Scott Brown Supports National Healthcare

In a speech today (at 5:00), Scott Brown reminded listeners that he voted for universal health care in Massachusetts and believes that it's important to get everyone on a national level "some form of health care... a basic plan for everyone:"

"I voted for health care here.... we're past campaign mode and I think it's important for everyone to get some form of health care. So to offer a basic plan for everyone I think is important... there are some very good things in the national health care plan that is being proposed"

Perhaps even more disappointing, Scott Brown even "denied he was intent on derailing the [health care] reforms," saying "I never said I was going to do everything I can to stop healthcare. I believe everybody should have healthcare, it's just a question of how we do it."

Mr. Brown's comments may come as a surprise to many of his ardent supporters in the grassroots "tea party movement" to restrict the size, role, and influence of government.

They indicate that he does not in fact oppose the Democrats' health care bills on principle, but because he believes that "we can do it better" and wants to take the process of reforming (which for him means "continuing to socialize") health care "back to the drawing board."

We must always remind ourselves that the vast majority of politicians are no friend to liberty.

Brown is considered a "moderate" in a state that is just barely to the right of France. From the freedom perspective, he wants to "moderate" our individual liberty. There are no significant numbers of liberty minded people where he lives.

The "Tea Party" isn't a political party, and the day it becomes one (in the form of the traditional parties) it will cease to be useful in my opinion. Right now it is just (thankfully) a movement away from the hard left. It is different things in different states. It remains to be seen where it will go.

But it is moving things in our direction, even if frustratingly slowly. Two years ago such groups were non-existent. I'm thankful to see a tiny spark of sanity in the ashes of the now incinerated concept of classical liberalism.

Carl- me too. And I really mean that. I do certainly hope that at the very least this will railroad the health bills in Congress and help us hang on until November when we can seat some true believers like Rand Paul among many others.

Ration Nation USA- I disagree that Brown was the only alternative. We also had a true small government candidate, Libertarian Joe Kennedy. You may argue that he was a long shot... but so was Brown. You may argue that he wasn't in either of the two main parties, but neither was Doug Hoffman. I don't know how or why folks settled on Brown, but he was not the only or best alternative.

Grant- I really do hope the tea party movement stays true. Its reaction to this (among other things) has me concerned that it's losing focus and displaying weakness. I'm on the edge of my seat...